So you’re scrolling through LinkedIn and finding someone who looks perfect for your open position. Great education, solid work history, fantastic recommendations. Everything about their profile screams “hire me immediately.” But wait – maybe that profile is a little too perfect.
LinkedIn is everywhere in Indonesia now. Your candidates use it, your employees use it, and probably your boss uses it too. But here’s what nobody talks about: with millions of people trying to stand out, a lot of them are bending the truth pretty hard. Some are outright lying. This stuff can bite you later.
The LinkedIn Inflation Problem
Here’s what most HR professionals don’t realize: LinkedIn profiles operate on what we call “professional inflation.” Almost everyone stretches the truth a little, and some people stretch it beyond recognition.
Job titles get puffed up all the time on LinkedIn. Your “Marketing Coordinator” suddenly becomes a “Marketing Manager.” That “Junior Analyst” now calls themselves a “Business Analyst.” The person who used to be a “Sales Associate” is now a “Business Development Executive.”
People also mess around with how long they work. Three months as an intern magically becomes “6+ months of experience.” Contract gigs get passed off as permanent jobs. They overlap job dates to hide employment gaps or really short stints.
Then there’s the responsibility inflation. Someone who managed a company’s Instagram account is now claiming “Digital Marketing Strategy Leadership.” Sitting in a few training sessions becomes “Professional Development in Advanced Analytics.” Being part of a team project? They “Led cross-functional initiatives.”
Even education gets a makeover. Online courses become “specialized certifications.” Attending a one-day workshop becomes an “advanced training program.” Sometimes incomplete degrees get presented as finished qualifications.
The Technical Skills Deception
Indonesian professionals get really creative when listing technical skills on LinkedIn. The platform’s skill endorsement system makes it super easy to look competent in areas where you actually know very little.
Software skills are rarely what they seem. “Expert in Excel” might mean someone who can do VLOOKUP functions. “Advanced PowerBI skills” could mean they watched some YouTube videos. “Python programming” might be someone who has finished a basic online course.
Language skills get blown out of proportion constantly. “Business English proficiency” might mean someone who handles basic emails okay but would struggle in actual meetings. “Conversational Mandarin” could be knowing how to order food and ask for directions.
Industry knowledge claims get problematic fast. You work on one banking project, and suddenly you’re a “Financial Services Professional.” Attend a healthcare conference and boom – you have “Healthcare Industry Expertise.”
The Reference and Recommendation Red Flags
LinkedIn’s recommendation system looks trustworthy, but it’s way easier to game than most HR people think.
You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours – that’s how most LinkedIn recommendations work. Colleagues write nice things about each other because they know they’ll get the same treatment back. These mutual praise circles don’t tell you anything about real performance.
People also recycle the same recommendation templates. You’ll notice suspiciously similar language when one person writes recommendations for multiple colleagues. The same person writes recommendations for five different people using almost identical words. Just swaps out names and companies.
Check this out – someone got a great recommendation in 2019, and it’s still there, making them look good. But what about now? Are they still performing at that level? LinkedIn doesn’t remove old stuff, so that five-year-old praise keeps working for them.
Anyone with a LinkedIn account can write recommendations. Your neighbor could write one for you. That person you met once at a conference could praise your “outstanding leadership skills.” These endorsements might sound professional, but tracking down whether the writer actually knows the candidate’s work is nearly impossible.
The Visual Deception Tactics
How someone looks on LinkedIn can mess with your judgment in ways that affect hiring decisions.
A good professional photo doesn’t mean someone is good at their job, but it’s just our mind that starts to think that way. Nice headshots make profiles seem more trustworthy, even when the qualifications underneath are shaky.
Company logos create instant credibility. Someone who worked at Google for three months gets the same visual credibility boost as someone who worked there for three years. The logo association does all the heavy lifting.
Regular posting and commenting can be completely artificial. People share industry articles and leave generic comments to look engaged and knowledgeable. But this content strategy doesn’t mean they actually understand what they’re sharing.
The Connection Count Game
LinkedIn connections create an illusion of professional network strength that often doesn’t reflect real relationships.
Connection farming is huge on LinkedIn. People add hundreds of random strangers just to make their network look impressive. A thousand connections mean nothing if you’ve never actually talked to 90% of them.
Job seekers especially love to connect with tons of people in industries they want to break into. This makes them look more established in a field where they might be complete newcomers.
Some people specifically target connections in cities where they want to work. This makes them appear locally networked when they’re actually outsiders looking for opportunities.
The Activity Timing Tricks
LinkedIn activity can be engineered to make people look more professionally engaged than they really are.
People ramp up their posting and commenting right before job applications. This creates artificial activity spikes that make them seem like active industry participants.
Generic comments on trending business topics are everywhere. People drop meaningless responses like “Great insights!” on popular posts to appear engaged with current issues.
Some networking groups have unofficial agreements where members automatically like and comment on each other’s content. This boosts everyone’s engagement numbers artificially.
Why Indonesian HR Teams Get Fooled
Several things make Indonesian recruiters particularly vulnerable to LinkedIn tricks.
Verifying educational credentials is tough when you’re dealing with international schools or smaller local institutions. Fake degrees from obscure universities can slip through initial screening pretty easily.
Indonesian business culture values relationship-building, so extensive LinkedIn connections seem normal even when they’re completely artificial.
Language barriers can hide problems in English-language profiles. HR teams might focus on technical qualifications and miss communication issues or inconsistencies.
Reference verification gets tricky when former employers are international companies or startups that shut down. Good luck tracking down someone who can verify employment history.
What LinkedIn-Only Screening Actually Costs You
When you rely mainly on LinkedIn profiles for candidate evaluation, you’re setting yourself up for problems.
Skills mismatches only become obvious after you’ve hired someone. Then you discover they can’t actually do the things their profile claimed they could handle.
Cultural fit problems show up when someone’s online persona doesn’t match how they actually communicate or work with others.
Their LinkedIn profile made them sound like they could handle anything, so now everyone expects miracles. Turns out they’re just okay at their job.
The team dynamics get weird when someone’s actual personality doesn’t match their online brand. They seemed like natural leaders and great team players online. In reality? Maybe not so much.
Building Better Screening Processes
Don’t throw LinkedIn out completely – it’s useful when you use it right. Just treat profiles as starting points for conversations, not proof of qualifications.
Test actual skills in interviews instead of accepting claimed expertise. Put real work in front of them during interviews. See if they can actually do what their profile claims.
Ignore LinkedIn recommendations completely. Pick up the phone and call people who actually managed them or worked alongside them.
Call their schools. Call their previous companies’ HR departments. Verify the basic facts instead of trusting their profile.
Give new hires a few months to prove themselves. Some people interview well and have great profiles, but can’t deliver when it matters.
Every person you bring onto your team changes how things work around your office. That LinkedIn profile might tell the truth about someone’s abilities. Then again, it might not. Spend some time checking before you make decisions you’ll regret.
